If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

- it potentially could work against viruses... -

Originally Posted by Ian

Thats all we need to be able to control. ...

Ooo
I wish to learn more on bees and their viruses! Unfortunately, my expertise is limited by common biochemistry. Viruses are very flexible and adaptable. Look at influenza - this year vaccine was a disaster - virus outperform all our scientific predictions! How much money have invested in immuno-deficit virus (HIV) or hepatitis-C, but problem if far far away from solving. You eradicate one virus and two new will occupy the niche very quickly. From business-model prospective, it is a "Holy Grail" - selling a specific dsRNA for every strain of the virus in tons! Crazy! From my prospective, it would be more desirable to eliminate the carrier, the mite. Another part of solution is to minimize stress on our bees - it is well-known that stress destroys the immune system (real one). We do not need Monsanto for this.

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

I can imagine that Bayer may well want to find a way to control varroa....

when able to chose, honey bees tend to avoid neonics.

the fact is that neonics are in bee hives.
so the question is what effect is the non-lethal level of neonic having.

If it causes the brood to take longer to develop...
pay attention to that IF. the rest of this stands on it.

Longer capped brood times will mean that varroa can develop at a higher rate
than a hive free of neonics. (drone brood has a reputation for being Varroa preferred)
this will mean the low level of neonics cause varroa to be far more
difficult to manage.

Under that circumstance it will look like varroa are the cause of
a colony failure.
The real cause for the colony's death is neonics weakening the hive
enough for an oportunistic parasite to finish the job.
various other pathogens could do the same,
and varroa is common in the USA.

Perhaps this can explain Austrailia's lack of colony colapse.
They have a reputation for not having varroa in their hives.

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

Originally Posted by victor miranda

The real cause for the colony's death is neonics weakening the hive enough for an oportunistic parasite to finish the job. various other pathogens could do the same,
and varroa is common in the USA. Perhaps this can explain Austrailia's lack of colony colapse. They have a reputation for not having varroa in their hives.

Australia has no colony collapse disorder and no varroa yet it uses alot of neonics. So that's a hint that getting rid of the varroa may solve some of the collony collapse problems.

In the USA, according to Dr. David Fischer with Bayer CropScience http://www.forbes.com/fdc/welcome_mjx.shtml "there does seem to be a correlation between recent occurrence of CCD and the presence of residues of Varroa control chemicals. In these situations, hives with lower rates of CCD generally have higher varroacide residue levels. This suggests that beekeepers who are more vigilant in controlling Varroa are less likely to have CCD in their colonies."

So that's a second line of evidence that getting rid of varroa (not getting rid of the neonics) is what's important.

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

I will say that in total Victor is making a train a bit longer. From the arguments I have seen in various conversation.
1. it is not Varroa that kill bees. it is the viruses that Varroa make the bees susceptible to.
2. Bees are not prone to being infested with Varroa IF it where not for the Neonics weakening them enough to make them a suitable host.
3. then we all know that neonic are not harmful to bees even though they are a pesticide. because nobody targets bees when they are applied. of course nobody is in the corn field apply nics to corn plants with an eye dropper but we are pretty certain that the mass application methods that it is applied with could not possibly result in contamination of the entire environment. It could not even result in the partial contamination of the environment. Nics have some way of only apply to plant if their is intent involved.

So we have a poison that weakens the bees so they are susceptible to a parasite that infects them with a virus that kills them.

Or we could really stretch our imaginations and think that a pesticide in fact kills an insect.

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

Thank you for the article. I have difficulties to understand how obvious facts may be mass-ignored in US? Before neonics, France had 40-45 kilos of the sunflower honey per hive and it reduced to 22 kilos during the neonics era. In order to compensate loses, the number of hives were doubled during same period of time. Nice correlations. Very simple - there is no need to speculate regarding CCD or Australia.

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

"The summary of the report states: „The results of the examination on the risks of the seeds-treatment GAUCHO are alarming. The treatment of seeds by GAUCHO is a significant risk to bees in several stages of life.” The 108-page report was made by order of the agricultural ministry of France by the universities of Caen and Metz as well as by the Institut Pasteur."

"In November 2010, an EPA document was released, detailing the risks to honeybees from exposure to clothianidin, a neonicotinoid similar to imidacloprid. The EPA document states: "This compound is toxic to honey bees. The persistence of residues and potential residual toxicity of clothianidin in nectar and pollen suggests the possibility of chronic toxic risk to honey bee larvae and the eventual instability of the hive."[45]"

"In 2012, researchers announced findings that sublethal exposure to imidacloprid rendered honey bees significantly more susceptible to infection by the fungus Nosema, thereby suggesting a potential link to CCD.[34] Two research teams led by Jeff Pettis at the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Cedric Alaux at INRA/France have demonstrated that interactions between the pathogen Nosema and imidacloprid significantly weaken the immune systems of honeybees (Apis mellifera). In their research, Alaux et al. (2010) found that bees infected with Nosema and exposed to 0.7 ug/kg imidacloprid had an increased rate of mortality compared to the controls. The combination of Nosema and imidacloprid also significantly decreased the activity of glucose oxidase, an important enzyme that allows the bees to sterilize their colony and brood food. Without this enzyme, bees can become more susceptible to infections by pathogens.[35] Both the USDA study and the INRA study demonstrate that a combination of stressors (pesticides and pathogens) may be responsible for the recent high level of bee losses."

"Researchers from Harvard School of Public Health write that new research provides "convincing evidence" of the link between imidacloprid and the phenomenon known as Colony Collapse Disorder. Lead author of the study, Chensheng (Alex) Lu, stated that experiments showed a dose of 20 parts per billion of imidacloprid (less than the concentrations bees would encounter while foraging in sprayed crops), was enough to lead to Colony Collapse Disorder in 94% of colonies within 23 weeks.[30][50] The hives were nearly empty and the researchers did not find signs of the Nosema virus or Varroa mites.[51] "

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

"The allegation that neonicotinoids-based pesticides are inherently damaging to bee colonies or populations is not true. For example, evidence from Scotland shows that there is poor bee health even though there is very low neonicotinoid pesticide use. However, there is a high incidence of the Varroa mite in Scotland which may better explain the poor bee health.

In France, the level of colony losses is similar in mountainous areas to that on agricultural land.

In Australia, neonicotinoid-based seed treatments are used widely but there have been no reports of significant declines in the health of bees. Indeed, many Australian beekeepers have exploited this by sending their bees to countries such as the United States in order to provide contract pollination services. Not surprisingly, the Government of Australia is keen to protect bee health and its prime goal is to concentrate on policies to prevent the Varroa from invading Australia and to have emergency plans for eradicating the Varroa mite should it eventually arrive there.

In Madagascar neonicotinoids are virtually unused but beekeepers have been suffering substantial bee losses since the recent introduction of the Varroa mite in 2009.

In Switzerland, there have been reports of significant declines in bee health in upland areas of the country. Neonicotinoids are not used in these areas and cannot be held responsible.*The Swiss Government reported in the summer of 2012 that pesticides were not the cause of declines in bee health.

South Africa and Brazil both use neonicotinoid-based pesticides widely, yet both countries have good bee health. However, both of these countries have low incidences of the Varroa mite due to the increased presence of the Africanized honey bee which is able to delouse itself.

There is therefore no direct correlation between neonicotinoids use and poor bee health, although a correlation can be drawn between bee losses and the presence of the Varroa mite."

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

Seriously? You're quoting a puff/spin piece put out by Syngenta? Don't you think they might be just a tad biased seeing as they're the number one producer of neonics which is a $3 billion a year product line?

But it's not really a big surprise I guess, seeing as it's pretty obvious you are employed by the pesticide industry...

"The allegation that neonicotinoids-based pesticides are inherently damaging to bee colonies or populations is not true. For example, evidence from Scotland shows that there is poor bee health even though there is very low neonicotinoid pesticide use. However, there is a high incidence of the Varroa mite in Scotland which may better explain the poor bee health.

In France, the level of colony losses is similar in mountainous areas to that on agricultural land.

In Australia, neonicotinoid-based seed treatments are used widely but there have been no reports of significant declines in the health of bees. Indeed, many Australian beekeepers have exploited this by sending their bees to countries such as the United States in order to provide contract pollination services. Not surprisingly, the Government of Australia is keen to protect bee health and its prime goal is to concentrate on policies to prevent the Varroa from invading Australia and to have emergency plans for eradicating the Varroa mite should it eventually arrive there.

In Madagascar neonicotinoids are virtually unused but beekeepers have been suffering substantial bee losses since the recent introduction of the Varroa mite in 2009.

In Switzerland, there have been reports of significant declines in bee health in upland areas of the country. Neonicotinoids are not used in these areas and cannot be held responsible.*The Swiss Government reported in the summer of 2012 that pesticides were not the cause of declines in bee health.

South Africa and Brazil both use neonicotinoid-based pesticides widely, yet both countries have good bee health. However, both of these countries have low incidences of the Varroa mite due to the increased presence of the Africanized honey bee which is able to delouse itself.

There is therefore no direct correlation between neonicotinoids use and poor bee health, although a correlation can be drawn between bee losses and the presence of the Varroa mite."

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

Seriously? You're quoting a puff/spin piece put out by Syngenta? Don't you think they might be just a tad biased

What's inaccurate about what Syngenta said? Or what Dr. David Fischer from Bayer said in the post I linked to above? Or what Bayer's bee expert Dick Rogers says:

http://journalstar.com/news/local/mo...a5627480f.html "Bayer bee expert Richard Rogers brushed aside a New York Times article of March 28, 2013 that used the "mystery malady" description in reporting on a problem that has commercial beekeepers on edge."It's never been a mystery to me," Rogers said. Varroa and tracheal mites, the mites' resistance to the chemicals used to treat them, and an array of virus incursions, including the nosema virus, are among the major problems. The added strains on bees from being trucked back and forth between California and the Midwest every year also are taking a toll, Rogers said. "There is no mystery-- period."

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

Seems to me that RJ Reynold's (et al) "scientists" said for years that their tobacco products were safe and did not cause cancer. Do believe that those industry-paid scientists were telling the whole story, or, do you think they were being paid to put a favorable spin on their employer's products?

Originally Posted by BlueDiamond

What's inaccurate about what Syngenta said? Or what Dr. David Fischer from Bayer said in the post I linked to above? Or what Bayer's bee expert Dick Rogers says:

http://journalstar.com/news/local/mo...a5627480f.html "Bayer bee expert Richard Rogers brushed aside a New York Times article of March 28, 2013 that used the "mystery malady" description in reporting on a problem that has commercial beekeepers on edge."It's never been a mystery to me," Rogers said. Varroa and tracheal mites, the mites' resistance to the chemicals used to treat them, and an array of virus incursions, including the nosema virus, are among the major problems. The added strains on bees from being trucked back and forth between California and the Midwest every year also are taking a toll, Rogers said. "There is no mystery-- period."

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

Originally Posted by Daniel Y

Really?

of course pesticides kill bees
pesticides is only one component of the problem, take that away and our hives are still dying from the rest of the list of hive related problems
by removing one pesticide from the market does not clear up the pesticide issue, another will take its place, you know, the ones that leave piles of dead bees infrount of your hives

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

Re: Monsanto & Bayer Working On Varroa Mite Solutions

Originally Posted by BigDawg

Seems to me that RJ Reynold's (et al) "scientists" said for years that their tobacco products were safe and did not cause cancer. Do believe that those industry-paid scientists were telling the whole story, or, do you think they were being paid to put a favorable spin on their employer's products?

What credible real world field study do you know of that shows Dr. David Fischer from Bayer was not telling the whole story when he wrote this?:
"Ultimately, there is no credible scientific evidence demonstrating a link between the use of neonicotinoid insecticides and the occurrence of widespread honey bee colony losses, including CCD."http://www.forbes.com/sites/markgibb...ayer-responds/